Agile software development

There are a number of agile software development methods; most attempt to minimize risk by developing software in short timeboxes, called iterations, which typically last one to four weeks. Each iteration is like a miniature software project of its own, and includes all of the tasks necessary to release the mini-increment of new functionality: planning, requirements analysis, design, coding, testing, and documentation. While an iteration may not add enough functionality to warrant releasing the product, an agile software project intends to be capable of releasing new software at the end of every iteration. In many cases, software is released at the end of each iteration.

Agile methods emphasize real-time communication, preferably face-to-face, over written documents. Most agile teams are located in a bullpen and include all the people necessary to finish software. At a minimum, this includes programmers and their "customers" (customers are the people who define the product; they may be product managers, business analysts, or actual customers). The bullpen may also include testers, interaction designers, technical writers, and managers.

Agile methods are sometimes characterized as being at the opposite end of the spectrum from "plan-driven" or "disciplined" methodologies. This distinction is misleading, as it implies that agile methods are "unplanned" or "undisciplined". A more accurate distinction is to say that methods exist on a continuum from "adaptive" to "predictive". Agile methods exist on the "adaptive" side of this continuum.

Adaptive methods focus on adapting quickly to changing realities. When the needs of a project change, an adaptive team changes as well. An adaptive team will have difficulty describing exactly what will happen in the future. The further away a date is, the more vague an adaptive method will be about what will happen on that date. An adaptive team can report exactly what tasks are being done next week, but only which features are planned for next month. When asked about a release six months from now, an adaptive team may only be able to report the mission statement for the release, or a statement of expected value vs. cost.

Predictive methods, in contrast, focus on planning the future in detail. A predictive team can report exactly what features and tasks are planned for the entire length of the development process. Predictive teams have difficulty changing direction. The plan is typically optimized for the original destination and changing direction can cause completed work to be thrown away and done over differently. Predictive teams will often institute a change control board to ensure that only the most valuable changes are considered.

The most important factor is probably project size. As size grows, face-to-face communication becomes more difficult. Therefore, most agile methods are more suitable for projects with small teams, with fewer than 20 to 40 people

--wiki

Top Countries for Outsourcing

Earlier this year, consultancy A.T. Kearney identified the most desirable outsourcing destinations. Countries were ranked by

1. financial attractiveness, based on such measures as compensation and infrastructure costs;
2. a so-called people score, measuring a nation's people skills, availability of language and educational skills, and the size and quality of the IT industry; and
3. their economic/political environment, infrastructure quality, cultural exposure, and IP security.

Country	Overall Score	Financial Score	People Score	Environment Score
India	6.9	3.2	2.3	1.4
China	6.6	2.9	2.3	1.4
Malaysia	6.1	2.8	1.3	2.0
Thailand	6.0	3.2	1.2	1.6
Brazil	5.9	2.6	1.8	1.5
Indonesia	5.9	3.3	1.5	1.1
Chile	5.8	2.7	1.2	1.9
Philippines	5.8	3.3	1.2	1.3
Bulgaria	5.8	3.2	1.0	1.6
Mexico	5.7	2.6	1.5	1.6
Singapore	5.7	1.7	1.5	2.5
Slovakia	5.6	2.8	1.0	1.8
Egypt	5.6	3.2	1.1	1.3
Jordan	5.6	3.1	1.0	1.5
Estonia	5.6	2.4	1.0	2.2
Czech	5.6	2.4	1.1	2.1
Latvia	5.5	2.6	0.9	2.0
Poland	5.6	2.6	1.2	1.8
Vietnam	5.5	3.3	1.0	1.2
UAE	5.5	2.7	0.9	1.9
USA (Tier II)	5.5	0.5	2.7	2.3
Uruguay	5.5	3.0	1.0	1.5
Argentina	5.5	2.9	1.3	1.3
Hungary	5.5	2.5	1.0	2.0
Mauritius	5.4	2.8	1.0	1.6
Tunisia	5.4	3.0	0.9	1.5
Ghana	5.5	3.3	0.9	1.3
Lithuania	5.4	2.6	0.8	2.0
Sri Lanka	5.4	3.2	1.0	1.2
Pakistan	5.3	3.2	1.0	1.1
South Africa	5.3	2.5	1.2	1.6
Jamaica	5.3	2.8	1.0	1.5
Romania	5.3	2.9	0.9	1.5
Costa Rica	5.3	3.0	0.9	1.4
Canada	5.2	0.8	2.1	2.3
Morocco	5.1	2.9	0.9	1.3
Russia	5.2	2.6	1.4	1.2
Israel	5.2	2.0	1.3	1.9
Senegal	5.1	3.2	0.8	1.1
Germany (Tier II)	5.1	0.5	2.2	2.4
Panama	5.1	2.9	0.8	1.4
UK (Tier II)	5.1	0.5	2.2	2.4
Spain	5.0	1.2	1.7	2.1
New Zealand	4.9	1.5	1.1	2.3
Australia	4.9	0.9	1.7	2.3
Portugal	4.8	1.6	1.1	2.1
Ukraine	4.9	2.8	1.0	1.1
France (Tier II)	4.9	0.5	2.1	2.3
Turkey	4.8	2.1	1.3	1.4
Ireland	4.2	0.4	1.5	2.3

Financial Score measures a country's financial attractiveness based on the costs of compensation, infrastructure, and taxes and regulations.

People Score measures a country's people skills and availability based on the IT/BPO (Business process outsourcing) industry size and quality, laborforce availability, educational skills, language skills, and attrition risk.

Environment Score measures a country's business environment based on the economic/political environment, infrastructure quality, cultural exposure, and IP security.

Source: A.T. Kearney Global Services Location Index 2007

--BusinessWeek

SSII (Société de services en ingénierie informatique)

Les SSII dans le monde et en France [modifier]

Les grandes SSII au plan mondial sont toutes présentes sur le marché français, mais leur rang sur le marché mondial peut être très différent de leur rang sur le marché français.

Les premières SSII sur le marché français sont les suivantes, par ordre de chiffre d'affaires décroissant. Le chiffre d'affaire inclut les licences, la maintenance, le conseil, l'assistance technique, l'intégration de systèmes, la formation, l'infogérance, la TMA, le conseil en management et les reventes de matériels; les chiffres marqués * sont des estimations PAC.

Rang	Sociétés	CA France 2005 (M€)	Remarques
1	IBM	2042 *	comprend IBM Global Services et IBM Software
2	Capgemini	1667	comprend Sogeti Région
3	Atos Origin	1526
4	Unilog / LogicaCMG	794
5	Accenture	770 *
6	Altran	669 *
7	HP services	637 *
8	Sopra Group	573
9	Orange Business Services	505 *
10	Steria	483
11	EDS	474
12	GFI, Adelior, Actif	419
13	Assystem	406 *
14	Amadeus	390 *
15	Bull services	365
16	CSC	315
17	Experian	321 *
18	Alten	319
19	CS	319
20	Thales Services	474

Palmares des sociétés de services d'après leur chiffre d'affaires en France.

Rang	Raison sociale	CA 2004 (m€) International	CA 2006 (m€) International	Remarques
1	Capgemini	4810	7700	-
2	Atos Origin	3876	?	-
3	Business Objects	855	?	Crystal Decisions inclus
4	Altran	723	?	-
5	Dassault Systèmes	698	?	-
6	Steria	540	?	-
7	Thales Information Systems	228	?	-
8	Osiatis	120	224
9	GFI Informatique	191	?	-
10	Lectra Systèmes	188	?	-
11	Unilog, LogicaCMG	128	?	-

--wiki

Hans Rosling, Statistic and Gapminder

Reviews

CNET Reviews http://reviews.cnet.com/
(United States Of America)
Pocket-lint http://www.pocket-lint.co.uk/
(United Kingdom)
Good Gear Guide http://www.goodgearguide.com.au/
(Australia)
TrustedReviews http://www.trustedreviews.com/
(United Kingdom)

Remote X application using ssh

My laptop at home

• Ubuntu 6.01
• IP: 213.114.153.11
• DHCP

Machine at University

• Debian
• IP: 130.236.144.243

I want to run X-application from the machine at university and output display to my laptop. Following is what I did

On my laptop

• Run xterm
  
• echo $DISPLAY to verify the DISPLAY variable
  
• Edit file /etc/ssh/ssh_config. Turn YES two following options

1. ForwardX11 yes
2. ForwardX11Trusted yes

• $xhost 130.236.144.243

Login to the machine at university using ssh

• $ssh -X username@130.236.144.243
• $export DISPPLAY=213.114.153.11:0.0
• xterm
  

It worked

Ref